Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T10:30:28.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perspectives on Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

James A. Stimson
James A. Stimson
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Symposium
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 151 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Enns, Peter K., and Kellstedt, Paul M.. 2008. “Policy Mood and Political Sophistication: Why Everybody Moves Mood.” British Journal of Political Science 38: 433–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., and Bhatti, Yosef. 2008. “How Poorly Are the Poor Represented in the US Senate?” Paper prepared for Conference on Homogeneity and Heterogeneity in Public Opinion: Cornell University, October 3–5, 2009.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., MacKuen, Michael B., and Stimson, James A.. 2002. The Macro Polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Shapiro, Robert Y.. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans' Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ura, Joseph Daniel, and Ellis, Christopher R.. 2008. “Income, Preferences, and the Dynamics of Policy Responsiveness.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44(4): 785–794.Google Scholar